Jump to content
Maestronet Forums

E.H. Roth Violin


KB_Smith
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Strad O Various Jr. said:

Yet to meet a good Scherl and Roth violin.

They exist, and the prices are increasing for vintage examples.

1 hour ago, khunsakee said:
First off, I'd like to apologize to @Violadamore, for supplying the links and quotes, to her. If I had enough Maestronet points and, been able to make more than 2 posts per day, perhaps the, obviously, RedBull induced, attack would have directly at me, the obvious target. I was only trying to ADD to the conversation. Apparently, some sort of very, very, raw nerve has been touched. Or, does Maestronet have a Fox, OANN or other equivalent outrage based, competitor forum some members are trying to audition, for?
Reading the condensed history, from the family Roth, could leave anyone to believe that the events of moving to America and the founding of S&R were closer in time than they were. However, pointing out that, one may have misconstrued information has never, in my experience, provoked such a vile and uncalled for response. Such is life.
Here is the, exact source (as I relayed to @Violadamore) of the, unmitigated bullshit, of my confusion:
 
"...Albert followed in his father`s footsteps as a violin-maker while Ernst Heinrich Roth II received a training in commercial life. In 1921 at the age of nineteen, her moved to America. Along with his friend Alban Scherl the company Roth and Scherl was founded. Thus Roth instruments and other products came on the North American market..."
 
"...Heinrich Roth was a seventh-generation violin maker who worked with his father, Ernst Heinrich Roth, and his brother, Albert, in the family shop in Markneukirchen, Germany. During the early 20th century, the family had built a reputation for making fine string instruments and sold many to visiting Americans. In 1922, Heinrich was persuaded by his American customers and friends to come to the United States, bringing the experience and reputation of Roth instruments with him..."
 
"...Ernst Heinrich Roth had two sons: Gustav Albert and Ernst Heinrich II. Albert Roth learnt the luthier trade from his father. Ernst Heinrich Roth II, on the other hand, received a training in commerce and in 1921 settled in the United States, where he founded a trading company, Scherl & Roth. It is through this company that many Roth instruments, bows and other merchandise came onto the North American market, where quite a number of them, from different periods and of very uneven quality, can be found to this day..."
 
"...These fine violins were so popular in America that Ernst Heinrich sent his son Ernst Heinrich II (1890-1961) to this country to represent the firm..." 
 
"...Ernst Heinrich Roth's son Ernst Heinrich Roth II emigrated to the US in 1921 and became one of the leading instrument dealers in North America with his company, Scherl & Roth. His brother Gustav Albert Roth stayed in Germany, learned the art of violin making and took over the family business after their father died in 1948..."  
 
 
Roth I's son, Ernst II, and Albert's son , Wilhelm, in front of portrait (I hope this is enough "proof" for him and, he doesn't think this is, too, condescending)
 
Ernst II (photo)                                                                                                        Albert (photo) 
 
                                                               Ernst I (painting)
 
Roth I's father (photo)                                                                                             ?? (photo) 
 
 
                                  Albert's son (standing)                Ernst II (standing)
 
 
WREHRFrontNeub.thumb.jpeg.ba49d8c8d8eb467acde88c64c046abae.jpeg

The problem here, as with several other violin-related historical issues, is that memories may become hazy when money is involved.  My own suspicion is that the Roth version of events, however inaccurate in detail, is the more trustworthy with regard to the spirit of what was going on when EHR II came to the USA.  I expect that he came over here with a prearranged business plan from his father, pre-agreed to by the other principals involved, along with a sufficient line of credit to do what was necessary to establish a supposedly independent, 100% American, Roth presence in the USA.  Everything that followed was more-or-less a done deal as soon as he stepped off the ship.   There would be legal and financial reasons for such an approach.

The needs of the successors to the Scherl & Roth trademark, OTOH, are probably best served by painting him as a young business genius who clawed his way up from nothing in the best American tradition.  They even change the name that they call him by, perhaps to distance him as far from EHR as possible. 

Speculation?   Sure, but it fits the facts, and I'd bet you that nobody's telling, either way.  :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 212
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

On 7/29/2021 at 9:33 PM, Violadamore said:

They exist, and the prices are increasing for vintage examples.

The problem here, as with several other violin-related historical issues, is that memories may become hazy when money is involved.  My own suspicion is that the Roth version of events, however inaccurate in detail, is the more trustworthy with regard to the spirit of what was going on when EHR II came to the USA.  I expect that he came over here with a prearranged business plan from his father, pre-agreed to by the other principals involved, along with a sufficient line of credit to do what was necessary to establish a supposedly independent, 100% American, Roth presence in the USA.  Everything that followed was more-or-less a done deal as soon as he stepped off the ship.   There would be legal and financial reasons for such an approach.

The needs of the successors to the Scherl & Roth trademark, OTOH, are probably best served by painting him as a young business genius who clawed his way up from nothing in the best American tradition.  They even change the name that they call him by, perhaps to distance him as far from EHR as possible. 

Speculation?   Sure, but it fits the facts, and I'd bet you that nobody's telling, either way.  :lol:

The very first "Ernst Heinrich Roth" catalog in the US was published in 1924 by Simson:

https://www.worldcat.org/title/master-violins-made-by-ernst-heinrich-roth/oclc/17386636&referer=brief_results

The photos aren't great but you can see a copy here:

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1924-catalog-master-violins-made-1892469379

This was kept in the same format by Scherl & Roth (no date, but I would guess late 30s):

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/master-violins-roth-antique-musical-1890722798

I've already posted earlier that "Simson & Frey" and "Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" were assignors of the "Scherl & Roth" trademark.

"Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" was founded by Herman Simson: (p.35 https://www.amica.org/images/Literature/Smythe/Music_Trades_19270122.pdf)

simsonpers.png

Simson & Frey was located at 19-24 E. 24th St., NY at the time of the "Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" trademark filing.  (The same address in the initial "Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" trademark filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office.) 

This is what's reflected in the historical record.  The only failure in memory is on the side of the Roth family and those "born yesterday."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hempel said:

The very first "Ernst Heinrich Roth" catalog in the US was published in 1924 by Simson:

https://www.worldcat.org/title/master-violins-made-by-ernst-heinrich-roth/oclc/17386636&referer=brief_results

The photos aren't great but you can see a copy here:

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/1924-catalog-master-violins-made-1892469379

This was kept in the same format by Scherl & Roth (no date, but I would guess late 30s):

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/master-violins-roth-antique-musical-1890722798

I've already posted earlier that "Simson & Frey" and "Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" were assignors of the "Scherl & Roth" trademark.

"Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" was founded by Henry Simson: (p.35 https://www.amica.org/images/Literature/Smythe/Music_Trades_19270122.pdf)

Simson & Frey was located at 19-24 E. 24th St., NY at the time of the "Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" trademark filing.  (The same address in the initial "Ernst Heinrich Roth Company" trademark filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office.) 

This is what's reflected in the historical record.  The only failure in memory is on the side of the Roth family and those "born yesterday."

simsonpers.png

Thank you for the resources.  The reference to "annual trips" undermines both of the "received versions", by suggesting that EHR II was shuttling back and forth between the US and Germany (carrying what, one wonders?), rather than settling in over here.

You seem to be ignoring that there are inaccuracies in all of the commonly published versions of the history of Roth activities in the US, something which I've been drawing attention to.  My surmise is that, having experienced damage to their American sales during WW I, and with US nativism and isolationism being on the increase, entering the 1920's,  EHR wanted to transition to doing business over here through a red-white-and-blue sockpuppet which they quietly, but tightly, controlled.  This would have been done cautiously to avoid any criticism of a "foreign takeover", which a more open approach could have invited (read some period editorials and such to get a feel for what I'm talking about).  IMHO, different versions of Scherl & Roth's history later emerged because of this slight-of-hand.

I'm fine with explaining this scenario in different ways until you grasp what I'm saying.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comment that got us all deeply into weeds of Roth history was a person declaring that he had not "seen any evidence EH Roth was associated with Scherl and Roth." 

Hopefully, he has now.

And, @Hempel, what do you know about Roth and Lederer, a firm which was exporting violins to America before the EHR firm was formed? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, uncle duke said:

If I were to run across one of these what could be a cut off date for a yes or no purchase?  Like if there was a 1929 available would it be smart to pursue?

I don’t have any particular opinion in this discussion, I’m just enjoying it. Regarding your question, I’m not sure I understand it: insofar as Roth Violins have any collectibility at all, it would seem that the mystery and debate would increase it, but I’m not sure they have much.

The best ones are good tools and sources of pride, but I doubt a single artist recorded in the last 50 years Chose to make their recording on a Roth. Although it’s probably impossible to say, I would doubt that any such artist would even have a Roth as their second instrument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GeorgeH said:

And, @Hempel, what do you know about Roth and Lederer, a firm which was exporting violins to America before the EHR firm was formed? 

I have not gone through a similar trademark exercise with R&L (German Trademark Office) as I have EHR Co., S&F, and S&R.  Other than having come across a couple of R&L instruments, I really don't know much about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hempel said:

I have not gone through a similar trademark exercise with R&L (German Trademark Office) as I have EHR Co., S&F, and S&R.  Other than having come across a couple of R&L instruments, I really don't know much about them.

Nobody does, really. However, it is evidence that EHR was importing violins into the United States for a few years before he started the Roth firm. So his son didn't come to the United States in the 1920s as a complete unknown.

I suspect that EHR had the ideas for how he wanted to run the Roth company based on his experience in R&L, and sensing the opportunity to sell a reliably higher quality product than most of the cottage industry exports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/30/2021 at 9:59 AM, Violadamore said:

Thank you for the resources.  The reference to "annual trips" undermines both of the "received versions", by suggesting that EHR II was shuttling back and forth between the US and Germany (carrying what, one wonders?), rather than settling in over here.

You seem to be ignoring that there are inaccuracies in all of the commonly published versions of the history of Roth activities in the US, something which I've been drawing attention to.  My surmise is that, having experienced damage to their American sales during WW I, and with US nativism and isolationism being on the increase, entering the 1920's,  EHR wanted to transition to doing business over here through a red-white-and-blue sockpuppet which they quietly, but tightly, controlled.  This would have been done cautiously to avoid any criticism of a "foreign takeover", which a more open approach could have invited (read some period editorials and such to get a feel for what I'm talking about).  IMHO, different versions of Scherl & Roth's history later emerged because of this slight-of-hand.

I'm fine with explaining this scenario in different ways until you grasp what I'm saying.  :)

First you claim EHR II immediately started S&R upon his arrival in 1921.  Now you imply Simson was some sort of sap/sockpuppet who got taken over by the Roth family.

EHR was downmarket for Simson.  At one point in time S&F was the exclusive US importer of (authentic!) E. Sartory bows.  This partnership only came to an end because Buegliesen and Jacobsen, another US importer of musical merchandise, flooded the US with fake German-made bows stamped with Sartory.  You can read all the gory details in Filimonov's "Phoney War" article in The Strad (2/2019).

Simson scoured Europe for stringed instrument makers and goods and he had good taste.  You apparently don't understand how business partnerships were formed and how they involved buying and vesting shares.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GeorgeH said:

Nobody does, really. However, it is evidence that EHR was importing violins into the United States for a few years before he started the Roth firm. So his son didn't come to the United States in the 1920s as a complete unknown.

I suspect that EHR had the ideas for how he wanted to run the Roth company based on his experience in R&L, and sensing the opportunity to sell a reliably higher quality product than most of the cottage industry exports.

I think you're making many unwarranted leaps of logic.  I remind you there are a few English-speaking countries other than the US.  They include UK, Canada, and Australia.  There's no evidence I'm aware of that Roth + Lederer was US import (although that's not necessarily an unreasonable assumption).  And it's generally agreed that the Roth-Lederer partnership ended in 1902, when EHR teamed up with his cousin Ficker.

There's also some evidence Simson imported EHR fiddles before 1922 and sold them under the Simson label.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GeorgeH said:

Nobody does, really. However, it is evidence that EHR was importing violins into the United States for a few years before he started the Roth firm. So his son didn't come to the United States in the 1920s as a complete unknown.

I suspect that EHR had the ideas for how he wanted to run the Roth company based on his experience in R&L, and sensing the opportunity to sell a reliably higher quality product than most of the cottage industry exports.

That Roth & Lederer were doing business with the US at least 20 years before the era we have been talking about is attested by labels (all in English) and probably other evidence I haven't looked for yet.  You should know, some of the better previous posts on R&L are yours:)

https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/344957-roth-and-lederer-violin/

https://maestronet.com/forum/index.php?/topic/318276-roth-lederer/

I find it telling that even the earliest R&L violins seem to be in the "homogenized" style later associated with EHR instruments (no delta, no six o'clock scroll, corners don't stick out forever), rather than merely being tarted-up Markies.  Here's some of those labels:

1581547214_RLLabelNDNN.thumb.jpg.ceaef54218ad1131575526d7409a6f09.jpg1492442159_RLD1912N75.jpg.b168e6863373dfcda3b59b7d9d77c331.jpg1170721348_RLMIG.jpg.ccdeb98d10208bc042815a5543eb5864.jpg1897075801_RLSig.jpg.22477ef7f6b9e28567a5f0e947aaafd1.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Violadamore said:

I find it telling that even the earliest R&L violins seem to be in the "homogenized" style later associated with EHR instruments (no delta, no six o'clock scroll, corners don't stick out forever), rather than merely being tarted-up Markies.

Indeed, I am a fan of Roth & Lederer violins. They aren't simply tarted-up Markies. They were made by people who knew how to make a violin.

But I can find very little primary source information about the Roth & Lederer firm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GeorgeH said:

Indeed, I am a fan of Roth & Lederer violins. They aren't simply tarted-up Markies. They were made by people who knew how to make a violin.

But I can find very little primary source information about the Roth & Lederer firm.

Well, we know what eventually happened to Max Lederer:

https://archiv.sachsen.de/archiv/bestand.jsp?guid=eee0b5bc-d0f6-402b-9307-b45f0b3189c5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, PhilipKT said:

I don’t have any particular opinion in this discussion, I’m just enjoying it. Regarding your question, I’m not sure I understand it: insofar as Roth Violins have any collectibility at all, it would seem that the mystery and debate would increase it, but I’m not sure they have much.

The best ones are good tools and sources of pride, but I doubt a single artist recorded in the last 50 years Chose to make their recording on a Roth. Although it’s probably impossible to say, I would doubt that any such artist would even have a Roth as their second instrument.

 I have always had good luck after listening to teachers so your words are heeded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GeorgeH said:

Thanks for the info on Max! Anything on the Roth & Lederer partnership?

The good news is I found the R&L trademark registration in US. 

I can also confirm that Roth+Lederer is the predecessor to EHR Co. I suspect R&L trademark was also under the auspices of Simson since its first use occurred in June 21, 1912 (2 years after the founding of S&F.)

It's likely R&L was first a partnership with EHR's father, Gustav Robert (if filed in Germany prior to 1902).  By the first use of the trademark "EHR" logo, EHR was 35 years old.

"Official gazette of the United States Patent Office v.188 March 1913"

p. 1041

rel0.png

"Annual report of the Commissioner of Patents for the Year 1913" (Department of the Interior)

p. 1059

rel2.png

p. 621

rel1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, martin swan said:

And don't forget Bottali-Roth-Pelitti ... :lol:

Martin is dragging a red-herring-turned-anchovy across our path.  :P  :lol:

The "Roth" in that is Ferdinando Roth, born in Adorf, Saxony in 1815, and died in Milan, Italy in 1898.  He established an instrument factory in Milan sometime between 1838 and 1842 (sources differ....again :rolleyes: ).  While his firm made and sold some violins, they are much better known for their brass instruments.   :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Violadamore said:

The "Roth" in that is Ferdinando Roth, born in Adorf, Saxony in 1815, and died in Milan, Italy in 1898.  He established an instrument factory in Milan sometime between 1838 and 1842 (sources differ....again :rolleyes: ).  While his firm made and sold some violins, they are much better known for their brass instruments.   :)

Haha again!

did he inspire Salustri?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, uncle duke said:

 I have always had good luck after listening to teachers so your words are heeded.

For what it’s worth, I would love to have a top level Roth cello from that era, I love those old German instruments and most of them sound great, collectible or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...